wilhelmWhat is the status of the new re-engined H-6?
Is there any firm consensus on what engine is used?
Is it in service yet?
wilhelmBecause it won’t be a flashpoint unless they make it one, & that’s strictly contrary to officially stated policy? See previous post.
I agree that is the politically stated position.
This is backed up by the extremely low defence budget allocation.
This has little to do with how the military planners forcaste potential flashpoints.
The attempt to retain a carrier aviation capability, no matter how silly that seems to me and you on the current budget, illustrates this.
The premise of the thread however, is a rise in defence allocation to the global average.
Put it another way: Say the defence budget goes up to the global average. Would you say the planners would ignore the potential flashpoint to their East?
wilhelmFunny, put the blame out regarding not answering questions, oddly enough neither of you answered mine a few weeks ago, I’m still waiting. Yep Wilhelm, quite a few of your posts got deleted by Frank as did some of Y-20 Bacon’s, and they weren’t ones that answered anything what I asked.
I’m not going to answer cr*p that are blatantly going to derail the thread even further, it’s what you both do – blow topics way out of proportion because neither of you like what other’s say that conflict with your own agenda.
I’m done dealing with trolls, regardless, cheers very much proving you are in more ways than one.
Ta!
No posts were deleted.
Your position is incoherent, flip-flopping between positions, and when I seek clarity, you run away.:confused:
Again:
Why on earth do you think the professional officers in the Argentinian Air Force would ignore a potential flashpoint?
What would make them uniquely different from any airforce on the planet, and neglect it?
Public relations doesn’t cut it as an answer.
wilhelmBacon, what did you do with Hamburger?
Did you eat him, with a nice Norwegian white sauce?
Quite a good thread you have going here.
What do you think the Argies should buy with a 2% spending splurge?
wilhelmThose quotes of mine have points to them. Yours got deleted by Frank. Go figure it out!
So instead of doing what you normally do, i.e. dragging things along and Trolling, why don’t you just stick to what we were discussing before!
Good grief.
No posts have been deleted, by the way. They are there for any poster to see.
Of course you posts have points to them.
They perfectly illustrate why somebody with a username like yours should not be interacted with.
It has always been a point of mine to treat people with such names with extreme caution.
This is why, even though it has flown completely over your head obviously, the more established posters treat Y-20 Bacon lightly.
Here’s the news:
He is a parody.
An intentional one.
One that you argue against.:highly_amused:
His various usernames over the years should reflect that, as well as some of his threads.
He’s actually making fun of posters with usernames like yours, as they’ve proven in the past to be somewhat blinkered, to put it mildly. Fanboys.
It’s always worth a chuckle.
Why not simply make posts that stick to the subject, without resorting to snide remarks as shown above, and getting entangled with multiple posters in arguments?
You still haven’t answered the question by the way.
Why on earth do you think the professional officers in the Argentinian Air Force would ignore a potential flashpoint?
What would make them uniquely different from any airforce on the planet, and neglect it?
Public relations doesn’t cut it as an answer.
But perhaps you actually do agree, as you’ve posted before in the quotes above, but seeing as you’ve flip-flopped once to a different position, can’t be seen to change your mind again?
Is that it?;)
wilhelmYou know too well what I’m talking about.
What snide nationalistic comments? If you can find any that I’ve made then feel free to quote them. Otherwise, stick to the topic and don’t bring certain topics up in the first place.
You know what?
I was going to bother, and started reading through the thread.
I found this from you.
Arguments and then insults directed to no less than 4 different posters.
Frankvw the mod has had to come in twice after your inputs and warn everybody to cool down and stay on topic.
The common denominator was you.
It’s by no means everything, as I stopped looking after a while once I realised what we have here.
One couldn’t make this nonsense up.
It was 31 years ago, Argentina. Get over it!
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard on here for quite a while.
The UK aren’t threatening Argentina in any way nor do they have any interest to strike mainland Argentina. If Argentina want to build their own military aviation industry then they’re best off coming to terms regarding what belongs to them, get a grip and work out how they can fix their economy
that they’ll be purchasing aircraft capable enough to reach and threaten The Falkland Islands, something which doesn’t belong to them and have no right to claim
just shows you’re a Spanner short of having a complete Tool Box. Get a clue before you spout nonsense.
Hot air…
Wow, a Chinese source without a word of English in it. How original. How about something more recent, in English, with proper Defence Analysts?
@Y-20 Bacon, very nice Trolling with the (now closed) “Royal Navy Vs the Entire Pakistan Air Force/Navy” Thread. Give yourself a Gold Star.
That’d look bad on them from an international point of view, signs of aggression & all that, sort of ironic to mention criminally negligent. But hey, lets not discuss that.
Then, you said this:
If Argentina want to rebuild their armed forces, more specifically military aviation for the forum’s sake, they’ve got to work out what the threats are to the country, obviously it’s the UK..
Which supports fully what I’m saying and that you’re getting angry about, for some bizarre reason. Then 2 posts later contradict yourself with:
Who’s threatening Argentina to a point where they’d have to counter it with 24 MKIs?
Let me ask this another way.
Do you believe that when the group of officers responsible for future requirements for the Argentine Air Force sit down, they willfully ignore certain parts of possible future flashpoints because, and let me get this right here,
That’d look bad on them from an international point of view.
The last thing Argentina wants is negative coverage.
May I submit that you are confused here with what exactly their job entails?
They are planners, not public relations executive.
May I further submit that you are at best, an argumentative, angry person looking for a clash, as on other threads, but more probably, simply a troll.
Then you have the hypocrisy to say this:
Otherwise, stick to the topic and don’t bring certain topics up in the first place.
after posting this:
That’d look bad on them from an international point of view, signs of aggression & all that, sort of ironic to mention criminally negligent. But hey, lets not discuss that.
This beggars belief.
The thread was doomed when you arrived.
wilhelmAs I stated earlier a few weeks ago. That’d look bad on them from an international point of view, signs of aggression & all that, sort of ironic to mention criminally negligent. But hey, lets not discuss that.
It is their job.
They are not public relations managers.
Their job is to forecast events, scenarios, needs, and doctrine, scaling them in priority.
What is so difficult to understand about this?
Almost every single airforce on the planet does this.
Please leave the snide nationalistic comments out.
It serves no one.
Let’s follow your own advice at the end, shall we?
wilhelmThe biggest issue I have with this thread is that every time the Falklands/Malvinas is the point of stupid discussions. Personally I think that the Argentine AF needs to have some way of modern air defence fighters to come up with it’s close neighbours Chile and Brazil. Upgrading there Air Force (and other assets) has nothing to do with those islands. The Mirage III needs to be replaced by a more modern air defence aircraft for the defence ot it’s boundries… not to invade any of the islands. Every time when something is comming up with the subject fighter aircraft for Argentina, everybody is starting the 1982 issue over and over again. Sick! No one in the Argentine AF is speaking about any new weapon system for use against the Britiish, it’s a complete bull**** talk here. The Mirage III/Dagger’s must be replaced by a better aircraft do defend the capital and other area’s. Also…. why not talk about trainer aircraft and additional hard needed transports for the Argentine AF. Right now they are even bigger problems….. to train enough pilots for future… and to transport material to Antarctica and Argentine UN troops worldwide. Hope people want to start talk about serious things and interesting facts, not crap talk.
Cheers.
The planners of the Argentine Air Force would be criminally negligent not to factor in the Falklands, whether you personally like this fact or not.
Granted, there are many other operational tasks other than the Falklands, but to say that it isn’t a consideration, even a realtively small one at present, beggars belief.
Of course, if you provide evidence that you are privy to the strategic high ranking planning of the Argentine Airforce top brass, it would be welcomed here.
It doesn’t mean a polite conversation cannot be had about it.
wilhelmIndeed. They had a lot of up to date equipment in 1982. On the ground their Small Arms Weapons were, technically at least, better in some than what the British had – if one can use the term ‘better’. For example, the automatic FN FAL Argentine troops had compared to the single shot version the British had with the SLR. However, many argue that the single shot version was better since the rifle in general kicked like a Horse there for fully automatic was rather pointless, affected accuracy in other words.
As an ex-infantry man, I can guarantee that the automatic feature was rarely used, if they were trained correctly.
Even 5.56mm rapid fire is simply a waste of ammunition. Somebody has to get ammunition to the frontline, and there is a limit to the amount of ammunition a human being can carry.
However, there are definite advantages to retaining the automatic function. For certain types of assault work, supressive fire, etc the fully automatic feature (or controlled bursts rather) is extremely valuable. I know what I would choose, as did the British Army with the FAL replacement. The recoil is precisely the same in single shot obviously.
The Argentinians had better boots, and better night sights too, if I recall correctly.
Mostly swings and roundabouts though.
On the Z-11 helicopter, I was corrected earlier on. I thought it was in service already.
What is the status of this programme?
wilhelmStill, from what I can gather the SAAF regarded the Mirage F-1 as probably a better platform than even the Cheetah C if suitably modified. The whole F-1 fleet was to go through a comprehensive upgrade, with the Cheetah C cockpit and avionics/ECM/radar/weapons fit (the architecture was designed with that expressely in mind), as well as various airframe tweaks, such as a new composite verticle tail with a new bulged base for avionics space, ala the F-16, and IFR probe.
Some interesting pictures of some of the South African Mirage F1 upgraded cockpit features, from about 20 years or more ago.
This was the first edition, so you’d think that other changes would have happened in the final config, such as the HUD being the same as found in the Cheetah C.
wilhelmOn the topic, I recall some articles a few months back that Israel is the worlds largest exporter of UAVs.
Not being that interested in the UAV world, I wouldn’t be able to confirm that, but it would not surprise me.
wilhelmAll of a sudden its “in the past” now. The guy talked about the present and future. And somehow all of it its true 🙂
Right, nothing invented in Israel – if the forum would like to support this level of knowledge, who am I to hassle.
As Swerve has said, that is not at all what I said.
Please don’t be so selective in your quoting.
For example, you left this part of my short post out:
This is not to say there hasn’t been diligent and creative, inventive work by some very skilled people in the aviation sector, …
it will be niche market stuff like UAVs, weapons, and electronics.
And in that, they have some very good products indeed.
As most of the posters here can read, it doesn’t serve your point very well.
Before saying things like “Right, nothing invented in Israel – if the forum would like to support this level of knowledge, who am I to hassle”, may I politely suggest paying more attention to what is actually being written?
To paraphrase your good self, the forum supports this level of comprehension.:dev2:
wilhelmAs I understand it Israel was able to lever what technology they developed (funded by America) for the Lavi into their various aircraft upgrade offers.
Just off the top of my head, the multi-mode pulse doppler Elta 2032 radar developed for the Lavi is found, in different variants, on the upgraded Chilean F-5, the Turkish upgraded F-4, Indian upgraded Jaguar maritime strike variants, Mig-21 Lancer upgrade as used by Romania, Kfir C10 for Ecuador and Columbia, Cheetah C now operated by Ecuador….. and I’m not sure if I missed anybody out.
It has been integrated with and is planned to equip the KAI FA-50 and HAL Tejas until further notice.
A little known fact is that 90% of the Lavi programme was paid for by the US.
A very interesting in-depth behind-the-scenes article on the Lavi by the Federation of American Scientists:
wilhelm:stupid:
Actually, there is a lot of truth in what the previous poster said that elicited your thoughtful response.
I certainly wouldn’t use the perjorative language he used perhaps, but it is absolutely indisputable that Israel has in the past benefitted hugely from tech transfer and information that has basically come almost for free, courtesy of the US taxpayer.
This is not to say there hasn’t been diligent and creative, inventive work by some very skilled people in the aviation sector, but the facts are very well known.
On topic, it is rather obvious that Israel has devoted the majority of its resourced into UAVs, weapons, and electronics.
Heavy manned platforms are completely out of the picture.
They simply don’t have the capital for an indigineous top line fighter. It would swallow almost all the resources of the other branches.
Even the Lavi was funded massively by the US. Quite a few other Israeli weapons programmes that came to fruition in the late 80’s/early 90’s would simply not have been possible without the co-funding of a certain nation that was under embargo.
As stated, it will be niche market stuff like UAVs, weapons, and electronics.
And in that, they have some very good products indeed.
wilhelmThankfully there are saner heads in argentina that realize buying an outdated plane known for its horrid maintenance record,
You’ve kept repeating this.
Put up the evidence of “horrid F-1 maintenance”, or stop repeating the lie.
Because contrary to your “opinion”, the Mirage F-1 has demonstrated excellent availability over the years, which actually can be proven, across more than a few airforces.
Sign In
